Sony has only made Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, Spyro, Crash Bandicoot, Graffiti Kingdom, Ape Escape, Dog's Life, LittleBigPlanet... I could go on for ages.
Now, I like Nintendo. I mainly grew up with Sony consoles, but I have also owned many Nintendo portable consoles. GBC, GBA, DS, and now a 3DS.
Nintendo's exclusive games are great. I've played a good chunk of them on my GameCube and N64 that I got recently, but to say Sony has no good/original games is a bit biased.
no i didnt mean those games, the new one that are coming out lately...what do you see?
almost always a guy with a gun shooting, uh uh thanks BF4 and CoD ghosts for giving us fresh stuff!
those that you wrote where the games of the golden age of Sony!
their are little games i am happy that will come out on PS3 and PS4, but they are very little, a bit of a trash, they take some famouse game and make another one based on it.
you can not say no to this, the only games i am waiting for (and waited for) are knack, god of war, tom clancy: Division, BF4, littlebigplanet 2, the walking dead season 1 and the last of us.
some are shooters, but more original than any other shooter like CoD or BF, hey are games that didnt pick directly from someone elses basket, and tried to make a much more original and new things in an already famouse game genre.
buddy am going to be honest with you. ya i dont like the wii u but all my child hood memories i had a gba and its still my favorite system i have to date i still play it once a week. next if you dont know but the wii u sucks in sales right now look at the ps4 or xbone they are the ones who will survive maybe because the wii u is really last gen system 7 years late.
next you want some good sony games will, shadow of colossus one of the best games in the 6th gen, i dont know if you like gta or not but that game started out only on ps1 so with out sony no gta v, the last of us i dont think there was every a mushroom zombie game like it before. and again many sony only games are improved on the ideas they took. but atleast we dont see kill zone party8 or new uncharted bros 2
i know perfectly that the WiiU is failing and you know why? because their are people like you that exageratingly under rates the WiiU, if nintendo makes a new game (not a sequel) it has fresh ideas and new concepts, thing that Sony latley isnt doing much lately, and thank you for doing a copy and paste of the other guy that commented above you, and check the anwer taht i gave him for its an answer also for you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
While alive, you have a 100% chance of dying, so don't sweat it.
Roleplay characters:
Death (me)
War
Pestilence
Famine
"Yet another stands before me... Then so be it. For the curse of life, is the curse of want. And so, you peer... Into the fog, in hope of answers."
The Wii-U is probably one of the better consoles for Next-Gen.
The problem is the marketing.
Nintendo didn't release their killer app, or announce it in time. Now everyone is focusing on Sony and Microsoft. Nobody cares about the wii-U because it still doesn't have any games. (it does, but since they are focusing on S and M, they don't see all the games that N is putting out.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Hello there dear Sir or Madam. What can I do for you today?
Which would net you more variety of games, and in the end, fun? A playstation and an xbox? Or one of the two and a wii u?
You'd get far more variety from a good PC and a 3DS. You'd hit the better exclusive IPs, indie games, light mobile games, really intensive games, you'd basically get the everything.
The Wii-U is probably one of the better consoles for Next-Gen.
The problem is the marketing.
Nintendo didn't release their killer app, or announce it in time. Now everyone is focusing on Sony and Microsoft. Nobody cares about the wii-U because it still doesn't have any games. (it does, but since they are focusing on S and M, they don't see all the games that N is putting out.)
In every way its inferior to both PS4 and Xbox One... from capabilities by making the ONLY reason to get one is because its the cheapest (equivalent to current Xbox 360 and PS3) and from its very limited library because Nintendo does not like third parties their main focus is the 20 year old IP's that have been milked yearly with little if any improvement compared to its predecessor.
Doesn't mean these facts should stop you from enjoying it.. I like Super Mario World 3 but instead of buying the "HD" version I would just play the original.. and I like OOT as well and instead of buying the more linear/Puzzle based(meant for the head directors child)/Cell shading art style I would just play OOT again.
In every way its inferior to both PS4 and Xbox One... from capabilities by making the ONLY reason to get one is because its the cheapest (equivalent to current Xbox 360 and PS3) and from its very limited library because Nintendo does not like third parties their main focus is the 20 year old IP's that have been milked yearly with little if any improvement compared to its predecessor.
Doesn't mean these facts should stop you from enjoying it.. I like Super Mario World 3 but instead of buying the "HD" version I would just play the original.. and I like OOT as well and instead of buying the more linear/Puzzle based(meant for the head directors child)/Cell shading art style I would just play OOT again.
Not trying to start a flamewar, but I disagree. Nintendo usually focuses on improvement in their titles. Pikmin 3 had many features that took full advantage of the GamePad's features. These features improved the games RTS element by a ton. Is that "little to no" improvement?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
...but everything changed when the Fire Nation attacked...
Quote from Raffilcagon »
Ultimate, if you let me take a wee bit of your DNA, I should be able to clone you a Gardevoir and you can populate the Earth.
their main focus is the 20 year old IP's that have been milked yearly with little if any improvement compared to its predecessor.
Unlike COD or Modern warfare or those other games, which are completely different every time.
Actually,Nintendo's franchises switch up and make innumerable gameplay improvements with their predecessors.
Super Mario Brothers 3, for example, added two-way scrolling and the ability to select from various independent paths on a map screen, as well as adding an inventory, innumerable new items and enemies, and the game itself is a lot longer than it's predecessors.
Super Mario World improved on that by making the map more concise and eliminating the Inventory, focussing more on gameplay changes and the addition of some refinements to mechanics such as flight. It also adds secret exits, secret levels and secret worlds. Fundamentally each installment adds an assortment of new content, enemies, and mechanics, while sticking to the same formula- it's very much the same for their other franchises.
I like Super Mario World 3 but instead of buying the "HD" version I would just play the original..
There is no Nintendo Game titled "Super Mario World 3". the 3D game available on the Wii U is a new game in it's entirety, which sticks to the tried and true platforming mechanics that have made Mario so popular, while removing or changing the surrounding mechanics.
and I like OOT as well and instead of buying the more linear/Puzzle based(meant for the head directors child)/Cell shading art style I would just play OOT again.
You seem confused. OOT is equally linear in that each dungeon requires an item that you found in the previous dungeon. In fact, this is practically a given in almost every Zelda game, with only a few exceptions. You seem to be referring to Wind Waker but none of your facts line up at all, since it's no more linear than it's predecessor. Nor does it really seem to be more puzzle based (and if it was, that would be nice, I'm sick of trivially obvious 'puzzles'). I guess you might mean the remake but all that does is reduce the ridiculous fetch quest for pieces of the Triforce of courage. (Still a fetch quest, but reduced).
The irony here is that, you are saying "the games never really change" as a negative, and then are effectively saying you wouldn't play the games beyond OOT because they have changed.
In my opinion, Wii U=Nintendo's biggest fail. I like Nintendo's other consoles, like the 3DS or the N64. I wish they would remake Majora for thw 3DS, though.
Man then you don't know Nintenodo. Ok the worst was a tie with the 64DD and the Virtualboy. I my self would get the OUYA over those consoles. Even the Dreamcast has better graphics then the Wii and Wii U. Have you seen Shenmue at 1080p yes you have to upschalle it and it only works with 97% of all the games, but that is better the the Wii and Wii U, case solved.
I love how everyone is saying Nintendo is doomed like its a bad thing.
Doomed Nintendo is the best Nintendo (i don't the company to die, i've just been noticing alot of people saying Nintendo is doomed, despite them going fairly well.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Hello there dear Sir or Madam. What can I do for you today?
I love how everyone is saying Nintendo is doomed like its a bad thing.
Doomed Nintendo is the best Nintendo (i don't the company to die, i've just been noticing alot of people saying Nintendo is doomed, despite them going fairly well.)
probably some microsoft or sony fans, cuz i think nintendo is just about to bloom.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
While alive, you have a 100% chance of dying, so don't sweat it.
Roleplay characters:
Death (me)
War
Pestilence
Famine
"Yet another stands before me... Then so be it. For the curse of life, is the curse of want. And so, you peer... Into the fog, in hope of answers."
The problem with Nintendo is that their 3rd party support is basically non-existant, so games like Watch dogs, Witcher 3, Metro last light (just naming a few) are not coming to Wii U is a bad thing.
Watch Dogs will be on Wii U, actually, which will be exciting. I'm also looking forward to Bayonetta 2.
Poor marketing
Lack of 3rd party support
Fewer sports and racing titles compared to Sony and Microsoft
No real "must-have" online multiplayer games (Smash Bros. may help once its released, but then again it's more of a party multiplayer series, best played with friends in the same room, but wuddeva')
Unlike COD or Modern warfare or those other games, which are completely different every time.
Actually,Nintendo's franchises switch up and make innumerable gameplay improvements with their predecessors.
Super Mario Brothers 3, for example, added two-way scrolling and the ability to select from various independent paths on a map screen, as well as adding an inventory, innumerable new items and enemies, and the game itself is a lot longer than it's predecessors.
Super Mario World improved on that by making the map more concise and eliminating the Inventory, focussing more on gameplay changes and the addition of some refinements to mechanics such as flight. It also adds secret exits, secret levels and secret worlds. Fundamentally each installment adds an assortment of new content, enemies, and mechanics, while sticking to the same formula- it's very much the same for their other franchises.
There is no Nintendo Game titled "Super Mario World 3". the 3D game available on the Wii U is a new game in it's entirety, which sticks to the tried and true platforming mechanics that have made Mario so popular, while removing or changing the surrounding mechanics.
You seem confused. OOT is equally linear in that each dungeon requires an item that you found in the previous dungeon. In fact, this is practically a given in almost every Zelda game, with only a few exceptions. You seem to be referring to Wind Waker but none of your facts line up at all, since it's no more linear than it's predecessor. Nor does it really seem to be more puzzle based (and if it was, that would be nice, I'm sick of trivially obvious 'puzzles'). I guess you might mean the remake but all that does is reduce the ridiculous fetch quest for pieces of the Triforce of courage. (Still a fetch quest, but reduced).
The irony here is that, you are saying "the games never really change" as a negative, and then are effectively saying you wouldn't play the games beyond OOT because they have changed.
I do not see any difference between them and especially not enough to buy a Wii U or even a Wii for the games on it compared to the versions I already own. For either of the two franchises. If you do so be it. And even if they were night/day compared to anything else in their library the facts I posted about the Wii U would still prevent me from purchasing the platform because its utterly embarrassing its what the Wii should have released as not what it should have succeed.
Not trying to start a flamewar, but I disagree. Nintendo usually focuses on improvement in their titles. Pikmin 3 had many features that took full advantage of the GamePad's features. These features improved the games RTS element by a ton. Is that "little to no" improvement?
Does Wii U come stock with a mouse and keyboard with full support for pikmin 3? Because that's the only viable way to play a actual RTS game that hasn't had everything torn from it for the sake of simplicity.
The problem with Nintendo is that their 3rd party support is basically non-existant
This is because the XBox and Playstation have fewer (if any) content restrictions, and are more open to cross-platform.
so games like Watch dogs, Witcher 3, Metro last light (just naming a few) are not coming to Wii U is a bad thing.
I'll take your word for it.
The other problem is that their exclusives are not interesting, Nintendo always seems to take the nice and safe route with their games.
They do not have the liberty of taking chances when their games and game products are literally their only revenue stream. Also, each time they change things things go south.
Zeldas and marios all the time
Mario, Zelda, Fire emblem, Golden sun, Kirby, Donkey Kong, Earthbound, F-Zero, StarFox, Metroid, Pokemon, Pikmin... The reason they present new installments of these franchises is because that is what people that buy a Nintendo console want.
sure they can be "innovative" but they are not fresh or anything we haven't pretty much seen before.
Do people seriously listen to themselves, when they say this? the Playstation has basically First-person shooters. XBox has first person shooters, with some in space. And the argument against Nintendo is that "they don't do anything new?" Seriously? Each installment of their franchises sure as hell provide more content than most new 'installments' of games on other systems. 'COD Ghosts' is just an overpriced expansion pack. "Here, it's the same basic game but we added some new crappily designed levels and weapons, It's a good thing most of you kids are too young to remember Aerowalk or you might actually realize how crap this game is"
Nintendo should do something new and refreshing, maybe try a bit more mature game for a change?
Mindless First-person shooters are the forte of their competition.
Nintendo makes their killing by appealing to those who don't like mindless first-person shooters.
For me their exclusives are actually worth playing. Xbox and PS exclusives are basically yet another first person shooter of some description, and the vast majority are available on or will be available on PC eventually anyway.
Nintendo hasn't come up with a new IP in over a decade.
Wii Fit and Nintendogs. And Nintendo Land. But let's not let facts get in the way. They are allegedly creating one for the Wii U after Mario Kart 8 is released. Even so, creating a new character doesn't necessarily mean the game is going to be fun. it needs focus on creating a new gameplay experience that's fun and unique, and they do that with most of their new installments.
That's pretty ridiculous. If they actually bring some fresh titles to the Wii U, maybe it will sell better.
Are you kidding? the only reason I'm thinking of buying one is because they have the same franchises. I'm not interested in anything the other consoles offer and certainly not at their ridiculously retarded price points.
I do not see any difference between them and especially not enough to buy a Wii U or even a Wii for the games on it compared to the versions I already own.
I'm not sure what you are referring to, in particular, considering the comparisons I gave were to games that aren't even on the Wii. So the real question here is:
-You mentioned OOT. You realize that every argument you posed against (presumably, Wind Waker, but also it would apply to say Skyward sword or Twilight princess) in favour of OOT works perfectly against OOT in favour of A Link to the Past? In fact, OOT is more similar to A link to the past in many ways than some of the supposed "copies" are to OOT. At least Wind Waker abandoned that two-installment old world duality thing- that was something.
For either of the two franchises. If you do so be it.
If you do not see the differences, than you are simply blind.
And even if they were night/day compared to anything else in their library the facts I posted about the Wii U would still prevent me from purchasing the platform because its utterly embarrassing its what the Wii should have released as not what it should have succeed.
You're "Facts" were garbage. 1.
-"In every way it's inferior to both the PS4 and the Xbox One"
That applies equally comparing PS4's and XBox One's. Enjoy the slippery slope on which you've build the foundation of your premise.
Personally I would still rather purchase a Wii U if the price points were reversed. IMO XBox and PS3's are garbage, and their games only slightly less so on average. Hell I didn't even take a Free XBox360 system MS wanted to send me through some MVP contest a few years ago. (it was NFR or I would have, and sold it...) I can't remember what I got instead but my neighbors stole the package. oh well.
I find Nintendo's Library less limited because it is also more diverse. Just within Nintendo's own franchises (Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Fire Emblem, Golden Sun, Kirby, Donkey Kong, Earthbound, F-Zero, StarFox, Metroid, Pokemon, Pikmin etc) there is a very diverse assortment of games, forms of gameplay, and a myriad of other factors.
and from its very limited library because Nintendo does not like third parties their main focus is the 20 year old IP's
It's actually the other way around- Third parties don't like some of the content restrictions Nintendo has in place. Restrictions which Nintendo itself follows in it's first-party offerings.
IMO The Xbox and Playstation systems are for children and manchildren who are afraid of being labelled as such and want to make themselves seem grown up, and what better way than by playing mature games. "These games have blood in them, I am an adult now.... HEY NO SPAWNCAMPING F****T!". Only children are afraid of being perceived as such.
that have been milked yearly with little if any improvement compared to its predecessor.
There you are again, repeating your same "facts" that have already been refuted.
Does Wii U come stock with a mouse and keyboard with full support for pikmin 3? Because that's the only viable way to play a actual RTS game that hasn't had everything torn from it for the sake of simplicity.
Command and Conquer was available on the N64. In any case the idea that you need a mouse and keyboard for RTS games is a mythos perpetuated by the fact that most RTS games have been designed for both. That's really the only reason- it's not because RTS games are better suited to a Mouse and Keyboard, it's because most RTS games are designed for a Mouse and Keyboard.
I'm not sure what you are referring to, in particular, considering the comparisons I gave were to games that aren't even on the Wii. So the real question here is:
-You mentioned OOT. You realize that every argument you posed against (presumably, Wind Waker, but also it would apply to say Skyward sword or Twilight princess) in favour of OOT works perfectly against OOT in favour of A Link to the Past? In fact, OOT is more similar to A link to the past in many ways than some of the supposed "copies" are to OOT. At least Wind Waker abandoned that two-installment old world duality thing- that was something.
If you do not see the differences, than you are simply blind.
You're "Facts" were garbage. 1.
-"In every way it's inferior to both the PS4 and the Xbox One"
That applies equally comparing PS4's and XBox One's. Enjoy the slippery slope on which you've build the foundation of your premise.
Personally I would still rather purchase a Wii U if the price points were reversed. IMO XBox and PS3's are garbage, and their games only slightly less so on average. Hell I didn't even take a Free XBox360 system MS wanted to send me through some MVP contest a few years ago. (it was NFR or I would have, and sold it...) I can't remember what I got instead but my neighbors stole the package. oh well.
I find Nintendo's Library less limited because it is also more diverse. Just within Nintendo's own franchises (Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Fire Emblem, Golden Sun, Kirby, Donkey Kong, Earthbound, F-Zero, StarFox, Metroid, Pokemon, Pikmin etc) there is a very diverse assortment of games, forms of gameplay, and a myriad of other factors.
It's actually the other way around- Third parties don't like some of the content restrictions Nintendo has in place. Restrictions which Nintendo itself follows in it's first-party offerings.
IMO The Xbox and Playstation systems are for children and manchildren who are afraid of being labelled as such and want to make themselves seem grown up, and what better way than by playing mature games. "These games have blood in them, I am an adult now.... HEY NO SPAWNCAMPING F****T!". Only children are afraid of being perceived as such.
There you are again, repeating your same "facts" that have already been refuted.
Command and Conquer was available on the N64. In any case the idea that you need a mouse and keyboard for RTS games is a mythos perpetuated by the fact that most RTS games have been designed for both. That's really the only reason- it's not because RTS games are better suited to a Mouse and Keyboard, it's because most RTS games are designed for a Mouse and Keyboard.
The Xbox One and PS4 are in fact an improvement over the PS3 and Xbox 360, they are not equal by far the PS4 is the powerhouse for this generation but that's mainly due to MS wasting money on Kinect to ship with their platform instead of release it separately. If it wern't for the gamepad for the Wii U Nintendo would be making a profit for each console sold. Just as they did with the Wii.
Nintendo has one market still that they are winning in and I think they should just stay in and that's the handheld market. I can see myself buying one if I travel its certainly better then a Vita but at the same time a smart phone or I product libraries are growing rapidly. Every game on the Wii U would work flawlessly on a 3DS.
And when you list exclusives please try to keep ones that are up to date... Earthbound was originally released for the SNES a emulated version of the same game does not count as a "new release" Metriod and Samaus entire image has been completely ruined in Other M by making her a defensless high heeled sexy baby craving woman who needs men to help her face what she fears most instead of like the Prime series where she did that on her own. Hell you can go out and say Metal gear is a Nintendo exclusive going by your logic because up until MGS they released only on the NES
nintendo doesnt come up with many new series and charatcers because they know what their customers want, i love pokemon heartgold, white, white 2 and whu shouldnt i like X or Y?
they are the same game type only with a bit more story, a few new in game characters or something new not to relevant, thats what i like from nintendo, they always hit the sweet spot with everygame that they make.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
While alive, you have a 100% chance of dying, so don't sweat it.
Roleplay characters:
Death (me)
War
Pestilence
Famine
"Yet another stands before me... Then so be it. For the curse of life, is the curse of want. And so, you peer... Into the fog, in hope of answers."
To put this into perspective, the Wii U has already sold several times as many units as the Virtual Boy.
almost always a guy with a gun shooting, uh uh thanks BF4 and CoD ghosts for giving us fresh stuff!
those that you wrote where the games of the golden age of Sony!
their are little games i am happy that will come out on PS3 and PS4, but they are very little, a bit of a trash, they take some famouse game and make another one based on it.
you can not say no to this, the only games i am waiting for (and waited for) are knack, god of war, tom clancy: Division, BF4, littlebigplanet 2, the walking dead season 1 and the last of us.
some are shooters, but more original than any other shooter like CoD or BF, hey are games that didnt pick directly from someone elses basket, and tried to make a much more original and new things in an already famouse game genre.
what do you think of this. i know perfectly that the WiiU is failing and you know why? because their are people like you that exageratingly under rates the WiiU, if nintendo makes a new game (not a sequel) it has fresh ideas and new concepts, thing that Sony latley isnt doing much lately, and thank you for doing a copy and paste of the other guy that commented above you, and check the anwer taht i gave him for its an answer also for you.
Roleplay characters:
Death (me)
War
Pestilence
Famine
The problem is the marketing.
Nintendo didn't release their killer app, or announce it in time. Now everyone is focusing on Sony and Microsoft. Nobody cares about the wii-U because it still doesn't have any games. (it does, but since they are focusing on S and M, they don't see all the games that N is putting out.)
In every way its inferior to both PS4 and Xbox One... from capabilities by making the ONLY reason to get one is because its the cheapest (equivalent to current Xbox 360 and PS3) and from its very limited library because Nintendo does not like third parties their main focus is the 20 year old IP's that have been milked yearly with little if any improvement compared to its predecessor.
Doesn't mean these facts should stop you from enjoying it.. I like Super Mario World 3 but instead of buying the "HD" version I would just play the original.. and I like OOT as well and instead of buying the more linear/Puzzle based(meant for the head directors child)/Cell shading art style I would just play OOT again.
Not trying to start a flamewar, but I disagree. Nintendo usually focuses on improvement in their titles. Pikmin 3 had many features that took full advantage of the GamePad's features. These features improved the games RTS element by a ton. Is that "little to no" improvement?
Unlike COD or Modern warfare or those other games, which are completely different every time.
Actually,Nintendo's franchises switch up and make innumerable gameplay improvements with their predecessors.
Super Mario Brothers 3, for example, added two-way scrolling and the ability to select from various independent paths on a map screen, as well as adding an inventory, innumerable new items and enemies, and the game itself is a lot longer than it's predecessors.
Super Mario World improved on that by making the map more concise and eliminating the Inventory, focussing more on gameplay changes and the addition of some refinements to mechanics such as flight. It also adds secret exits, secret levels and secret worlds. Fundamentally each installment adds an assortment of new content, enemies, and mechanics, while sticking to the same formula- it's very much the same for their other franchises.
There is no Nintendo Game titled "Super Mario World 3". the 3D game available on the Wii U is a new game in it's entirety, which sticks to the tried and true platforming mechanics that have made Mario so popular, while removing or changing the surrounding mechanics.
You seem confused. OOT is equally linear in that each dungeon requires an item that you found in the previous dungeon. In fact, this is practically a given in almost every Zelda game, with only a few exceptions. You seem to be referring to Wind Waker but none of your facts line up at all, since it's no more linear than it's predecessor. Nor does it really seem to be more puzzle based (and if it was, that would be nice, I'm sick of trivially obvious 'puzzles'). I guess you might mean the remake but all that does is reduce the ridiculous fetch quest for pieces of the Triforce of courage. (Still a fetch quest, but reduced).
The irony here is that, you are saying "the games never really change" as a negative, and then are effectively saying you wouldn't play the games beyond OOT because they have changed.
Let's talk about the exclusive game on Xbox, take away all FPS's set in the near future and there is NONE
Doomed Nintendo is the best Nintendo (i don't the company to die, i've just been noticing alot of people saying Nintendo is doomed, despite them going fairly well.)
Roleplay characters:
Death (me)
War
Pestilence
Famine
Watch Dogs will be on Wii U, actually, which will be exciting. I'm also looking forward to Bayonetta 2.
Poor marketing
Lack of 3rd party support
Fewer sports and racing titles compared to Sony and Microsoft
No real "must-have" online multiplayer games (Smash Bros. may help once its released, but then again it's more of a party multiplayer series, best played with friends in the same room, but wuddeva')
I do not see any difference between them and especially not enough to buy a Wii U or even a Wii for the games on it compared to the versions I already own. For either of the two franchises. If you do so be it. And even if they were night/day compared to anything else in their library the facts I posted about the Wii U would still prevent me from purchasing the platform because its utterly embarrassing its what the Wii should have released as not what it should have succeed.
Does Wii U come stock with a mouse and keyboard with full support for pikmin 3? Because that's the only viable way to play a actual RTS game that hasn't had everything torn from it for the sake of simplicity.
This is because the XBox and Playstation have fewer (if any) content restrictions, and are more open to cross-platform.
I'll take your word for it.
They do not have the liberty of taking chances when their games and game products are literally their only revenue stream. Also, each time they change things things go south.
Mario, Zelda, Fire emblem, Golden sun, Kirby, Donkey Kong, Earthbound, F-Zero, StarFox, Metroid, Pokemon, Pikmin... The reason they present new installments of these franchises is because that is what people that buy a Nintendo console want.
Do people seriously listen to themselves, when they say this? the Playstation has basically First-person shooters. XBox has first person shooters, with some in space. And the argument against Nintendo is that "they don't do anything new?" Seriously? Each installment of their franchises sure as hell provide more content than most new 'installments' of games on other systems. 'COD Ghosts' is just an overpriced expansion pack. "Here, it's the same basic game but we added some new crappily designed levels and weapons, It's a good thing most of you kids are too young to remember Aerowalk or you might actually realize how crap this game is"
Mindless First-person shooters are the forte of their competition.
Nintendo makes their killing by appealing to those who don't like mindless first-person shooters.
For me their exclusives are actually worth playing. Xbox and PS exclusives are basically yet another first person shooter of some description, and the vast majority are available on or will be available on PC eventually anyway.
Wii Fit and Nintendogs. And Nintendo Land. But let's not let facts get in the way. They are allegedly creating one for the Wii U after Mario Kart 8 is released. Even so, creating a new character doesn't necessarily mean the game is going to be fun. it needs focus on creating a new gameplay experience that's fun and unique, and they do that with most of their new installments.
Are you kidding? the only reason I'm thinking of buying one is because they have the same franchises. I'm not interested in anything the other consoles offer and certainly not at their ridiculously retarded price points.
I'm not sure what you are referring to, in particular, considering the comparisons I gave were to games that aren't even on the Wii. So the real question here is:
-You mentioned OOT. You realize that every argument you posed against (presumably, Wind Waker, but also it would apply to say Skyward sword or Twilight princess) in favour of OOT works perfectly against OOT in favour of A Link to the Past? In fact, OOT is more similar to A link to the past in many ways than some of the supposed "copies" are to OOT. At least Wind Waker abandoned that two-installment old world duality thing- that was something.
If you do not see the differences, than you are simply blind.
You're "Facts" were garbage. 1.
-"In every way it's inferior to both the PS4 and the Xbox One"
That applies equally comparing PS4's and XBox One's. Enjoy the slippery slope on which you've build the foundation of your premise.
Personally I would still rather purchase a Wii U if the price points were reversed. IMO XBox and PS3's are garbage, and their games only slightly less so on average. Hell I didn't even take a Free XBox360 system MS wanted to send me through some MVP contest a few years ago. (it was NFR or I would have, and sold it...) I can't remember what I got instead but my neighbors stole the package. oh well.
I find Nintendo's Library less limited because it is also more diverse. Just within Nintendo's own franchises (Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Fire Emblem, Golden Sun, Kirby, Donkey Kong, Earthbound, F-Zero, StarFox, Metroid, Pokemon, Pikmin etc) there is a very diverse assortment of games, forms of gameplay, and a myriad of other factors.
It's actually the other way around- Third parties don't like some of the content restrictions Nintendo has in place. Restrictions which Nintendo itself follows in it's first-party offerings.
IMO The Xbox and Playstation systems are for children and manchildren who are afraid of being labelled as such and want to make themselves seem grown up, and what better way than by playing mature games. "These games have blood in them, I am an adult now.... HEY NO SPAWNCAMPING F****T!". Only children are afraid of being perceived as such.
There you are again, repeating your same "facts" that have already been refuted.
Command and Conquer was available on the N64. In any case the idea that you need a mouse and keyboard for RTS games is a mythos perpetuated by the fact that most RTS games have been designed for both. That's really the only reason- it's not because RTS games are better suited to a Mouse and Keyboard, it's because most RTS games are designed for a Mouse and Keyboard.
The Xbox One and PS4 are in fact an improvement over the PS3 and Xbox 360, they are not equal by far the PS4 is the powerhouse for this generation but that's mainly due to MS wasting money on Kinect to ship with their platform instead of release it separately. If it wern't for the gamepad for the Wii U Nintendo would be making a profit for each console sold. Just as they did with the Wii.
Nintendo has one market still that they are winning in and I think they should just stay in and that's the handheld market. I can see myself buying one if I travel its certainly better then a Vita but at the same time a smart phone or I product libraries are growing rapidly. Every game on the Wii U would work flawlessly on a 3DS.
And when you list exclusives please try to keep ones that are up to date... Earthbound was originally released for the SNES a emulated version of the same game does not count as a "new release" Metriod and Samaus entire image has been completely ruined in Other M by making her a defensless high heeled sexy baby craving woman who needs men to help her face what she fears most instead of like the Prime series where she did that on her own. Hell you can go out and say Metal gear is a Nintendo exclusive going by your logic because up until MGS they released only on the NES
they are the same game type only with a bit more story, a few new in game characters or something new not to relevant, thats what i like from nintendo, they always hit the sweet spot with everygame that they make.
Roleplay characters:
Death (me)
War
Pestilence
Famine